From: mark.rutland@arm.com (Mark Rutland)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH] ARM64: cmpxchg.h: Clear the exclusive access bit on fail
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 19:33:58 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150227193358.GF9011@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJhHMCBJB8Ca1bdapoOx9ecxAwxEPy+X5jv1VCnkCu_GRpyF8Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 07:15:57PM +0000, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 06:44:19PM +0000, Pranith Kumar wrote:
> >> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Catalin Marinas
> >> <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:
> >> > It's either badly formatted or I don't get it. Are the "stxr x1" and
> >> > "stxr x7" happening on the same CPU (P0)? If yes, that's badly written
> >> > code, not even architecturally compliant (you are not allowed other
> >> > memory accesses between ldxr and stxr).
> >>
> >> OK. Is that the same case with ldaxr (acquire) and stlxr (release)?
> >> AFAIK, memory accesses between acquire and release exclusive
> >> operations are allowed.
> >
> > The restriction on memory accesses in the middle of a load-exclusive
> > store-exclusive sequence applies to all the load/store-exclusive
> > variants, including ldaxr and stlxr.
> >
>
> Thanks Mark. I am trying to see where this restriction is documented.
> Looking at: http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.dui0802a/a64_data_transfer_alpha.html
> I do not see that mentioned. The only restriction relevant is that a
> stxr should use the same address as the most recent ldxr.
>
> Could you please point me to the relevant documentation?
You will need to look at the latest ARMv8-A Architecture Reference
Manual [1].
Table B2-2 defines the set of Load-Exclusive and Store-Exclusive
variants, including LDAXR and STLXR.
Taking this into account, take a look at the restrictions in section
B2.10.5 "Load-Exclusive and Store-Exclusive instruction usage
restrictions". One of the bullet points nodes that software must avoid
explicit memory accesses between a Load-Exclusive instruction and the
associated Store-Exclusive.
Thanks,
Mark.
[1] http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.ddi0487a.e/index.html
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-27 19:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-27 5:46 [RFC PATCH] ARM64: cmpxchg.h: Clear the exclusive access bit on fail Pranith Kumar
2015-02-27 10:06 ` Will Deacon
2015-02-27 18:25 ` Pranith Kumar
2015-02-27 18:33 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-02-27 18:44 ` Pranith Kumar
2015-02-27 19:08 ` Mark Rutland
2015-02-27 19:15 ` Pranith Kumar
2015-02-27 19:33 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150227193358.GF9011@leverpostej \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox